Minnesota has a bunch too. http://dnr.state.mn.us/snowmobiling/interactive_map/index.html I'm sure it's the same for other states. I personally don't snowmobile but have just noticed many ways tagged in OSM since they sometimes follow bike routes. :)
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Kevin Kenny <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that route=snowmobile makes more sense. Since there were exactly > zero uses of the tag in the US, I missed it entirely. (Then again, I don't > know how many jurisdictions have numbered snowmobile routes overlaid on the > highway and trail networks!) > > Are we agreed, then, on the following? > > - roles should be the same as for route=road > - name, network and ref should be filled in where available. In > general, either a name or a network/ref pair is expected. > - US:NY:snowmobile:corridor and US:NY:snowmobile:secondary are > reasonable choices for the network > > If I don't hear cries and screams, expect a proposal on the Wiki at some > point. (I also haven't abandoned access=permit, just gotten sidetracked on > some actual mapping and haven't got back to it yet.) > > Incidentally, US:NY:snowmobile:corridor and US:NY:snowmobile:secondary > form an extensive network of about 15000 km. There's a route map at > http://www.nysnowmobilewebmap.com/webmap/ The numbered routes are in red > (corridor) and orange (secondary). Blue are un-numbered routes belonging to > local clubs. The underlying GIS data that were used for that map are free > for us to use, but I do NOT propose an import because they don't meet my > standards of data quality. Just to begin with, they are digitized at an > inappropriately small scale. > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Brad Neuhauser <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> It may not be "officially recognized" but route=snowmobile is used some >> [0], and IMHO makes a lot more sense than route=road! >> >> [0] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=snowmobile >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Kevin Kenny <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> I thought sure that I had raised this question before, but a quick troll >>> through the archives doesn't seem to show it. >>> >>> New York State has an extensive network of designated snowmobile routes, >>> intended to be long-distance continuous paths. In some cases, they follow >>> highways, or logging roads on state land. In other cases, the state offers >>> grants to private landowners to maintain the route, funded out of >>> snowmobile registration fees. (At least that's my understanding of how the >>> system works. I'm not a snowmobilist). Except where the route is groomed >>> alongside a highway (or sometimes on the highway - not all our roads are >>> open to motor vehicles in winter), other motor vehicles are ordinarily >>> forbidden. >>> >>> These routes are marked with a highway shield, with reassurance markers >>> at intervals. There are even two tiers of routes: 'corridor' and >>> 'secondary'. Both are long-distance routes, so they are not appropriate for >>> the name=* field on a track or path. (Example: Haul Road No. 1 in the Dutch >>> Settlement State Forest is blazed for both the New York Long Path >>> (route=hiking) and Snowmobile Corridor Route 7B. A highway shield on a >>> snowmobile route looks like https://flic.kr/p/nPeMwe. >>> >>> We don't (yet?) have a 'route=snowmobile' officially recognized. What I >>> used recently when a hike (gathering map data for something else) took me >>> for a while on a snowmobile corridor was 'route=road >>> network=US:NY:snowmobile:corridor ref=7B'. (If it had been a secondary >>> route, it would of course have been US:NY:snowmobile:secondary.) I feel a >>> little uncomfortable about route=road, which seems to be tailored for motor >>> vehicles, but the tagging would be in all ways the same - type, network, >>> route, ref are all there, and even most of the roles are possible (there >>> are link trails, for instance, providing access to nearby highways, or >>> places where a route splits into a one-way pair). >>> >>> Does this sound plausible? >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
